Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The 51st and 52nd states
National Post ^ | June 7, 2003 | Lawrence Solomon

Posted on 06/07/2003 11:21:23 AM PDT by Mister Magoo

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

1 posted on 06/07/2003 11:21:23 AM PDT by Mister Magoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
I always love reading good fiction
2 posted on 06/07/2003 11:25:53 AM PDT by Lunatic Fringe (Tip the Pizza guy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
I'll take Alberta, and they can stuff British Columbia. Vancouver makes Seattle look like Greenville, South Carolina.
3 posted on 06/07/2003 11:26:49 AM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~Remember, it's not sporting to fire at RINO until charging~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
Make sure we DITCH vancouver as a free city though. Sasketwuan (sp?) may want to get in on this as well.
4 posted on 06/07/2003 11:27:27 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (We are crushing our enemies, seeing him driven before us and hearing the lamentations of the liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
54-40 or fight!


Maybe President Polk was right?

5 posted on 06/07/2003 11:28:00 AM PDT by SoftballMominVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
And grab the Yukon Territory as well.
6 posted on 06/07/2003 11:28:02 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (We are crushing our enemies, seeing him driven before us and hearing the lamentations of the liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
With Alberta as America's 51st state, the U.S. would secure 300 billion barrels of recoverable oil reserves, more than exist in Saudi Arabia. U.S. oil imports would plummet and America's great dependence on foreign oil would vanish.

If this is true, why isn't Canada selling us this oil at today's market price.  Something tells me there's more to the story.

7 posted on 06/07/2003 11:28:37 AM PDT by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
Actually there would still only be 50 states as we lose Kalifornia and Arizona back to Mexico.
8 posted on 06/07/2003 11:29:32 AM PDT by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
Interesting thesis.
9 posted on 06/07/2003 11:31:04 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
How about maintaining the same number and trading Alberta for say Washington or even better Massachuttes.
10 posted on 06/07/2003 11:31:24 AM PDT by bert (Don't Panic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
Canada's most conservative province -- anti-Kyoto, anti-gun control, hostile to national health care, receptive to plebiscites and Bible-belt Christians, free of provincial sales tax

Why join the United States, they should form thier own country. Then if Hillary is ever elected, ill have a place to go. We would just end up holding them back. Do you honestly think that the Democrats would let us drill for oil there if they were a 51st state? It would just be one huge wildlife preserve with higher taxes.
11 posted on 06/07/2003 11:31:57 AM PDT by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
the Supreme Court of Canada has already endorsed a province's departure if its citizens speak clearly on the matter.

If they joined the US they would give up this option for themselves and for all of their descendants. Independence would be a better option for them. Interesting that the Canadians have a voluntary union. They should call theirs States and we should call ours provinces.
12 posted on 06/07/2003 11:32:25 AM PDT by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
Bump
13 posted on 06/07/2003 11:33:39 AM PDT by Fiddlstix (http://www.ourgangnet.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
If this is true, why isn't Canada selling us this oil at today's market price. Something tells me there's more to the story.

We get about half of our oil from Canada, I think.

14 posted on 06/07/2003 11:34:08 AM PDT by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
The reason is simply that it is not economically feasible to extract much of Alberta's oil reserves. Much of the oil is located in "oil sands." Oil Sands are naturally occurring mixtures of bitumen, water, sand and clay that are found in three areas of Alberta - Athabasca, Peace River and Cold Lake.

Bitumen is a thick, sticky form of crude oil. At room temperature, bitumen is like cold molasses. It must be heated or diluted before it will flow into a well or through a pipeline.

If the oil sands deposits are close to the surface, bitumen can be recovered from the oil sands by open-pit mining and hot-water processing methods. Deeper deposits require in-situ methods such as steam injection through vertical or horizontal wells.

As new technologies are developed, up to 315 billion barrels are ultimately recoverable, compared with Saudi Arabia’s 262 billion barrels of proven reserves, U.S. reserves of 22 billion barrels and Mexico’s 28 billion barrels
15 posted on 06/07/2003 11:35:13 AM PDT by Mister Magoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw
Ohh sure, a state can leave our Union, you just have to have somthing like a 3/4 majority of the state legislator and 3/4 of the Senate and 4/5 majority of the house. So basically you are free to succede of no one else wants you.
16 posted on 06/07/2003 11:35:32 AM PDT by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
There are political problems with Vancouver, true. But the city is beautiful, and so is British Columbia as a whole. The weather along the coast is fairly moderate because of the ocean currents. Plus it would link the lower 48 with Alaska.

Sounds like a deal to me.
17 posted on 06/07/2003 11:36:01 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
If this is true, why isn't Canada selling us this oil at today's market price.

What makes you think they aren't? Still, the cost to process it is rather high I believe (removing the sand), but IIRC, Canada still is our no. 2 oil producer.

18 posted on 06/07/2003 11:36:34 AM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
Agreed, Saskatchewan and likely Manitoba also.

Not B.C. -- never, for any reason.

19 posted on 06/07/2003 11:36:54 AM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mister Magoo
United North America.
20 posted on 06/07/2003 11:39:00 AM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson